Gargamel

What scares me is that active vessels and such have a tendency to get swallowed up by the terrain instantly. I have a mod installed to keep that from happening, I think it might be similar to dividing by zero if I tried using this one at the same time. But for those doing cinematics and such, this might be pretty nifty.

^This first. Clear the locks. If not, reboot the game, and your computer. If not, you should... Ummm...... post again...

Auto strut is known for causing Kraken attacks in complicated builds. It usually best if you limit your auto strutting to parts that really need it.

It's not, but I was being pro-active, allowing a new comer to understand our culture and customs :D.

Since a good portion of this thread is about KSP vs real life, try running an abort in KSP where you decouple live SRB's during flight. It's usually very very messy. And another side note, I believe this thread was written when we were still using the old soup-o-sphere. The current KSP version's atmo is much better.

Those will do, the 9g's will probably be able to handle the loads, but they do make smaller, lighter, and stronger digitals, but for that, it'll cost ya.... Yup.

Did you check the BDA threads? Those would be the best source of info on this topic. And welcome to the forums. But as a general courtesy to our mod makers, who we adore and love, read this thread too before asking: If you are set on playing BDA, you can easily run a second install with a version of KSP that BDA works on, and implement a full mod set as you wish, while also keeping your 1.5 install.

Final Frontier mod is huge there. I would find the game pretty boring without it.

Well, since you can very easily run multiple installs.....

That's just weird..... I got nothing though.... anybody? @4x4cheesecake?

I'm really confused now. Who's doing what? A heavy cruiser, inland, in a channel, in enemy territory, is a sitting duck. Even land based artillery would have a field day with it, not too much long range Air, think Tirpitz here. There's no way command would drop such a valuable asset into such a poor situation. It would do much better to drop off a few observers/spotters on shore, and then back way the heck off, and bombard the area if it needs too. It would have room to maneuver then, and not get pinned down. Still vulnerable to air, but they'd have too look for it. A heavy cruiser is not a littoral vessel, it's really a small battleship. All sorts of Nope! right there. A heavy cruiser would not carry depth charges. They are too big, slow and lack the maneuverability to conduct ASW DC runs. Any sub worth it's salt would tear up a lone heavy cruiser. And like Derek said, recon subs like you are trying to create here, just do not exist. There are similarly sized subs for utility and rescue work, but they would just be way too small for any type of combat use. They would have no longevity, not enough weapons, and not have a very good sonar system. Subs are the smallest they can be for what they have to carry. Torpedoes are BIG, Sonar systems are BIG, diesel engines are BIG, banks of batteries are BIG. If you want a sub to have one or two of these capabilities, then I can see a mini sub maybe having a decent sonar system and an electric motor, but would need to be recharged by the cruiser. But to have a bit of all of these, each system pretty much has a minimum size that allows for a usable system, and if you have all of them on a sub, then you have a minimum size for a sub... If your cruiser has ASW capabilities on board, then it must have been designed with sonar. It's not a complicated structure to design into the hull of a ship: That little dome (and this is on a Arleigh-Burke class Destroyer, so a heavy cruiser should be about 2-3 times this size, plenty to handle that little dome) is really all the sonar capability a ship needs, if they have ASW helo's on board too.

Trim can be accidentally applied, as we have found in these forums from time to time, but since you nulled all the trim, that's been ruled out. I have occasionally encountered something similar, but only when using the MJ autoland feature. My only recourse is to manually turn off all the thrusters. As you are not using MJ, this is not the case, and turning off your RCS will completely defeat the purpose of what you are trying. Does it ever happen when you are not within phsyics range of another vessel? Did you jump over to the station and enable SAS to get the station to hold still? If you let the craft alone, does it ever assume a specific orientation, or does it induce an accelerating spin?

A sub constantly using it's active sonar is like saying you are trying to hide an active light house in the dark. The best scenario for this would be for the recon sub to stay passive, and just listen to everything that goes by. It could even set it self down on the ocean floor and nobody would ever "see" it. Let the cruiser fire off it's active sonar, and the sub can listen for returns from that too. But your point to it being vulnerable is absolutely right. Subs hate shallow water, which is what a channel usually is. And not only are channels shallow, they're narrow, so finding a sub in a channel is almost literally shooting fish in a barrel. Look up what the German Uboats had to go through to transfer from the Atlantic to the Med through Gibraltar during WWII. I'm not sure if this is a scenario you are creating, or one you have encountered, but duct taping a sub to a cruiser is probably the worst way to go about it. Let me roll a bit with this scenario. We have a Heavy cruiser patrolling a channel. Heavy cruisers are not known for their ASW capabilities, they're more of shore bombardment and surface warfare ships. They are usually not nimble enough for ASW maneuvers, and they are too valuable to be going directly against a sub alone. They are usually escorted by smaller ASW capable vessels, like destroyers or even light cruisers. But even a heavy cruiser might have helicopters on board, specifically used for ASW. Even if they don't, we're in a channel, which means we most likely have a friendly naval air station in the region, so we can get ASW air assets from that. These air assets carry sonobuoys, buoys that actively give off active sonar, and report their results back to a controlling source, the cruiser or helicopter in this instance. Since were patrolling a channel, the are we have to search is very small, and a tight constellation of buoys can be laid out. So you basically end up with a temporary version of a SOSUS line. Upon finding a sub contact, the air assets could prosecute it at will. In my scenario, our recon sub wouldn't even be in the area, or it's location would be well known to friendlies, to eliminate the chances of friendly fire. Another option is something like an ACTUV system, which I linked above. It is quite feasible for a heavy carrier to actually carry a couple of these on board if they were intending to 'blockade' a channel to enemy vessels. These are autonomous sub hunting drone ships, which once locked onto a target are nearly impossible to lose, since they use mainly active system to constantly hound a target. These fit your recon sub idea better, as they are small and light weight (relatively speaking), and are expendable if it comes to that. If one of the drones suddenly blows up, then you have a pretty good idea where your enemy sub is. But I think my point is, subs are not your best option for blockading a shallow water passage. A surface vessel with proper ASW assets is the best way to go about it. Even subs designed for littoral warfare would not want to be in this scenario. The sub trying to get through, though, doesn't seem to have a choice, so it has to make it's way through. Now, duct taping the attacking sub to the bottom of a large merchant vessel, is a "viable" option, hypothetically speaking. The scenario in Periscope Down! is tempting, but a good passive sonar system would be able to pick up the differences in blades and power plants, as @DerekL1963 said. But if you physically attached the sub to the underside of an oil tanker let's say, and shut it down almost completely, it would be hard for them to detect it. But that takes a lot of time and planning to pull off, and a heavy dry dock refit for the tanker, and your scenario may not have that option. Edit: There are ships, like the Glomar Explorer, which are designed to pick up and carry a sub. Actually GE maybe the only one, but if you happened to have one handy and nearby, it would work perfectly for this scenario.

At what range would flow noise be a usable data source?

Well..... They did something similar in Down Periscope! Passive Sonar would not be able to see the docked sub at all. But, they would know the blade rate for the carrier ship for given speeds. The docked sub would cause a lot of drag to the carrier ship, making it go slower than the blade rate would indicate. It would take a bit of time, but the sonar operators would see that something was amiss eventually. It wouldn't say what was happening, but they would know something was slowing the carrier ship. There are different types of active sonar. The classic one that sends out a single ping for weapons targeting would probably not be able to tell the difference. There is a chance, that if they know the exact class of vessel they are pinging, and the aspect of that vessel (the angle the target is presenting to the sonar), there may be a database of expected sonar returns vs distance. I highly doubt this exists, unless they are actively searching for a type of vessel that is carrying something big underwater. But then, if they know a type of vessel is suspected of this, they will just use the blade rate vs speed analysis to locate the offending one, so they can skip the active sonar pings that also reveal their own location. There is high frequency active sonar though. It is of very short range, less than 1 km or less, though. It's high frequency system gives a very high resolution. It can be viewed on a screen almost like a very grainy TV picture. It is often used in mine detection and location. I know the ACTUV system (Sea Hunter) was going to possibly carry a system for identification of targets it was tracking (I'm unsure if they actually included that or not, I'm pretty sure that's classified). So if a sub were to pull up along side the larger carrier vessel and scan it with the HF sonar, the docked sun would probably stick out like a sore thumb. I could imagine some sort of sea lane checkpoint if there was a concern about this in some fictitious setting. My assumption is that any transients or other noises would be near impossible to write off as not coming from the carrier ship. Unless there was some very specific noises that only come from that type of sub, torp doors opening, etc. So in short, assuming this is some action movie sub smuggling scenario... If the 'authorities' are actively looking for a vessel that might be carrying a sub docked underneath, then it would be pretty hard to hide it for very long. But if there is not an active search for it, it should go undetected for quite a while. Sonar systems might note something odd about a certain ship, but there wouldn't be too many red flags to alert people.

I highly doubt it, but it might if the vessel can be flown using only RCS. But I'm pretty sure the MJ docking module was written for zero g environments, and may not like the fact there is constant acceleration in one direction. It might not even engage because the target is landed. I dunno, but it's worth trying. You might have more success if you use something like the Docking Alignment indicator mod. Set your vessel to Radial Out, with the docking port on the bottom, and fly it like a Kerbal on EVA. Use the indicator to get you right over the target and slowly descend.

Well, given KSP is supposed to be an analog to our current space programs, if not slightly advanced in some areas, lacking in others, the concept of interstellar travel is right out the window in a stock game. While I personally hold out hope there is other life somewhere in our solar system, and we will discover it within my lifetime, it will have no real affects on the space program, in terms of KSP gameplay. There are already icons within the stock game that hint at alien life, but none is present within the system. So in order to find intelligent life that we could interact with, that would require interstellar travel. That is not feasible within the stock game. There are no other stars to visit, let alone planets. The technologies that are required to go interstellar do not exist within the game. Although, an argument can be made that since stock does not have a life support mechanic, that kerbals are immortal and can easily survive the long time frames required to make the journey. But I find that to be completely unrealistic and immersion breaking. There is already a mechanic in the game to allow for the acquisition of advanced technologies within the stock game, the Green Monoliths. If this were to be added to the game, it should be done as a mod. Working with the planet packs, a civilization could be created on some of the distant ones. Landing near one would enable the access to a variety of new techs, which would be part of the tech tree, but so costly that they would be unobtainable by normal means (of course, leave it to the KSP player base to take that as a challenge "Here, hold my snacks!"). Perhaps, perhaps, this would make for a really nice DLC. If they did it right, it would avoid my arguments that pre existing mods would negate most sales of a DLC, so they could actually turn enough profit to make it worth the development costs. It would also serve as a platform for other planets packs to be based on, similar to the mission builder editor. But then, that goes back to my original argument, how to get there? The stock game just isn't set up for that time of game play.

Sound like you have some trim set some where, maybe. Try hitting Ctrl-X to reset your trim. If that doesn't help, and I'm thinking it might not, but resetting your trim is the easiest first step.... Try docking from IVA, with the DPAI up. It takes a bit of practice, but is by far my favorite way to dock manually. Not only is it fun, but it might relieve the issue. Won't help for probes though. I have no idea why I think this might help, but it might help diagnose the issue, but I don't know how..... LOL. The symptoms you describe are usually trim related, but how you are describing them makes me wonder....

Holy spam batman. Next time please at least use spoiler tags around the log file, but much preferably use a 3rd partying hosting site to post log files. I'm surprised it even let you post that much. But correct me if I'm wrong.... but win32NT (win 7) is the 32 bit version of the OS..... the 64 bit shouldn't work. What do you mean disappears? Try launching it straight from the KSP.exe, ditch the launcher.

It shouldn't. You'll need to have completed your re-entry burn before jettisoning that section of the craft, so it will also re-enter and burn up. And what's with using a SRB as your upper stage? Betcha you'd fly a lot better if you swapped out your 2nd & 3rd stage engines...

Not only is Ctrl Z the only way, but if you make that big of a mistake where you have 25 steps to undo, you can remove and set aside whole sections of a craft, fix your single mistake easily, and re-attach the sections set aside. If re-attaching isn't going to work now because you need to redesign that whole section, the no amount of magic undo buttons will ever help. I've only really needed the undo button when I have grabbed and detached the wrong part, and it took me forever to line it up initially. With the editors being non linear, you can pluck individual parts out of a design as you need. And if it is, I believe you can remap it. Maybe not since that's a standard combination, but maybe. And kudos on the necro. Good use of the search!

I hear that, but if your budget is $2 and 1g..... As for live telemetry, I would fully expect a rocket to travel outside of wifi range. If not, the ESP-whatever breakout boards are very small. Arduino does have a 2.4ghz radio chip available, small and light, with basically LOS range, along with requisite software libraries. But it depends on budgets: money, size, and weight.

Way overkill too. I use ATTiny 45/85/44/84 chips for anything I need a really small package. All the circuitry can fit on the tip of my finger if you design the board correctly, bit bigger if not. The bigger chips (44/84) are about 3/4" long and about 1/4" wide (18mm x 6mm), the smaller ones about half that length. I won't even guess at the weight, but it's less than 2-3 US quarters. I think you'll need a Resistor and a cap too to filter the noise, but you could get away without. They will take the entire C++ language that you can put into a normal Arduino. You'll need to make yourself an ISP programming shield that runs off an Uno to program it. You just upload the ISP programming sketch onto the UNO, plop the shield on, drop the chip onto the shield, upload the Flight control program onto the chip, and then drop the chip onto the final circuit board. You can even add jumpers to your FC board if you need to reprogram it later, or just use a socket so you can pull the chip on and off at will, but that will add a bit of size and weight, but not much. The ISP programmer shield is easily to build, I did it in an afternoon. I have hand soldered entire boards on circular perfboard that were about 20mm diameter. The entire package from UNO to Attinys shouldn't run you more than $40 all said, depending on what you get. Each ATTiny runs about $1-$2 each, less if you buy in bulk (like a stick of 12 or so). And bulk may be good if you plan on wrecking some in a fiery crash. The reason you don't see them pushed a lot, is that they are a lone chip. You have to design your own IC board with it. That itself is it's own rabbit hole. But if you only have one or maybe 2 other IC's on the same board, it should be a fairly simple task to do. The art of home board making is pretty fun too. Even if you don't go with a printed board, perfboard is an option too, but that will add weight. At the very least someone can design you a board, and then you could send it out for fabrication. That's pretty cheap too. ATTiny 45/85 for size. It's the little black 8 legged chip in the corner. The 44/84's have an extra 8 legs for more connections if needed. And if you have the moxy and get a surface mounted version, rather than a through hole, they get tiiiiiiiiny.

Some people have a lot of mods. That's quite a chore for some of us.

Just tried it on Win 10, it does not. Nifty idea for a feature though.